4* PVP: Why not?

2

Comments

  • OneLastGambit
    OneLastGambit Posts: 1,963 Chairperson of the Boards
    TxMoose wrote:
    Meander wrote:
    The only arguement I can think of is 4* gets more into the haves and have nots by further alienating the non-4* players, but honestly PVP does this already, soooo.... icon_question.gif
    I've always wondered about how 3* bracket scoring would be if the 4s were removed. the cc scoring economy is driven by the front runners and I'm not sure how many 3* players are willing/able to front-run, meaning their scoring would just not be worth much. which would further divide things unless some more advanced guys chose to hang back and play in the intermediate pool. as it is now, I think 3*s can score some 4* covers via progression in s4 and maybe s3, if willing to spend just a little hp each event. but that might even be out of touch - been a long time since I was there.


    There already is an event they can't compete in for a reeeeeeaallly long time...it's called PvP.

    See if you don't have 4* then you can't compete meaning 3* and below players can't earn decent prizes. Separate the two tiers into 2 events and you solve that problem while having a negligible effect on 4* players since they don't see them that much anyway.

    As for why not? My only hypothesis is that people don't like change , even when they ask for it (see pve change for reference) people like familiarity and too much change makes people uncomfortable and complain.

    That's my only (and admittedly weak) hypothesis
  • TimGunn
    TimGunn Posts: 257 Mover and Shaker
    OneLastGambit wrote:
    As for why not? My only hypothesis is that people don't like change , even when they ask for it (see pve change for reference) people like familiarity and too much change makes people uncomfortable and complain.

    That's my only (and admittedly weak) hypothesis

    IDK, i get pretty excited when they change things up. Even small things like the change in mission difficulty announced last night.

    I always take it as a sign; if the game stops being updated and tweaked, it means the company is no longer putting resources into the game and it will die soon.
  • El Satanno
    El Satanno Posts: 1,005 Chairperson of the Boards
    simonsez wrote:
    There's no reason why players with an underdeveloped roster would have to know any of that content is there. Again, isn't this how pretty much all games work? You get past a certain point, and new tinykitty gets unlocked. Do players of those games complain in the beginning that everything isn't unlocked from the start?

    Given that hiding events has never happened, I can't see why that would have to start. I agree that other games work that way but it isn't how this has worked up to now. (Not to get distracted, but I think there is a growing expectation that everything should be unlocked at the start. Or at least some means to do so; witness the rise of "time-saver" purchases in many games now. Barf.)

    For argument's sake, what would the threshold be to see the 4* events? Having one/two/three/x fully covered? Leveled? Championed?
  • TxMoose
    TxMoose Posts: 4,319 Chairperson of the Boards
    OneLastGambit wrote:
    There already is an event they can't compete in for a reeeeeeaallly long time...it's called PvP.

    See if you don't have 4* then you can't compete meaning 3* and below players can't earn decent prizes. Separate the two tiers into 2 events and you solve that problem while having a negligible effect on 4* players since they don't see them that much anyway.

    As for why not? My only hypothesis is that people don't like change , even when they ask for it (see pve change for reference) people like familiarity and too much change makes people uncomfortable and complain.

    That's my only (and admittedly weak) hypothesis
    all depends on your definition of 'compete'. alliances 51-100 have tons of 3* players. most of those alliances have 800 pvp mins. that means, at a minimum, those guys are getting 2-3 covers/event from just pvp progression and alliance. you 'compete' at the level of your roster. no, not many are getting to 1K (but some do), and only a few get to 1300 (probably count on one hand), but should they have access to all the premium rewards compared to rosters that have much more time/effort/money into them? if your definition of 'can't compete' means they can't hit 1300 or come in t5, then you're absolutely right....they can't compete. pretty unreasonable definition though.
  • Slarow
    Slarow Posts: 204 Tile Toppler
    You don't need a separate PVP. You simply need to make it so there is a featured 4* each pvp in addition to the featured 3*. The center character on your team can be either the loaner 3* (same as now), your own 3* (same as now), or your own 4* featured (new). That's it. It would allow full 4* teams to play, and would bridge the current gap between 5*'s and everyone below them. 1*/2*/low 3* teams would not see these teams, as they would be too high level for them, so it wouldn't impact early-stage gameplay at all.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Slarow wrote:
    You don't need a separate PVP.
    Yeah, we do need multiple PvPs... unless you enjoy having every battle be OML/PHX/featured. Personally, I tired of that a LONG time ago.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    El Satanno wrote:
    For argument's sake, what would the threshold be to see the 4* events? Having one/two/three/x fully covered? Leveled? Championed?
    Maybe as soon as you fully cover one? I could see one 4* and two buffed 3*s being at least as competitive vs. 4* teams, as non-5* players are in the current scheme of things.
  • killerkoala
    killerkoala Posts: 1,185 Chairperson of the Boards
    simonsez wrote:
    Slarow wrote:
    You don't need a separate PVP.
    Yeah, we do need multiple PvPs... unless you enjoy having every battle be OML/PHX/featured. Personally, I tired of that a LONG time ago.

    well u'll enjoy oml/phx/featured 4*'s life.

    only way to change things up is to make pvp's that don't allow 5*'s.
  • Slarow
    Slarow Posts: 204 Tile Toppler
    simonsez wrote:
    Slarow wrote:
    You don't need a separate PVP.
    Yeah, we do need multiple PvPs... unless you enjoy having every battle be OML/PHX/featured. Personally, I tired of that a LONG time ago.

    How exactly will having a separate PVP change that? What are your top 3 characters/levels?
  • killerkoala
    killerkoala Posts: 1,185 Chairperson of the Boards
    something they could bring back is combined arms pvp but modify it so you have to use a 4*/3*/2*. also max cap everyone to level 270 instead of +50 or +100 on others.
  • GritsNGravy
    GritsNGravy Posts: 114 Tile Toppler
    Slarow wrote:
    You don't need a separate PVP. You simply need to make it so there is a featured 4* each pvp in addition to the featured 3*. The center character on your team can be either the loaner 3* (same as now), your own 3* (same as now), or your own 4* featured (new). That's it. It would allow full 4* teams to play, and would bridge the current gap between 5*'s and everyone below them. 1*/2*/low 3* teams would not see these teams, as they would be too high level for them, so it wouldn't impact early-stage gameplay at all.
    I really like this, the one tweak I'd add to make sure high level rosters don't just ditch their 3* roster. Make it progression based. Until you hit say 1000, you only play with the featured 3*. After hitting 1000 and getting the 4* reward, that character is the featured 4* you need to play with after that. You could even theme it as a tag team battle or something. Obviously the progression reward structure might need to be tweaked, but you could then expand that to 5* land with a 2000 progression or something.
  • JamieMadrox
    JamieMadrox Posts: 1,798 Chairperson of the Boards
    Friendly reminder. Posting data mined information and/or code from the game is against the rules. Please don't make me bring out the hammer.
  • JamieMadrox
    JamieMadrox Posts: 1,798 Chairperson of the Boards
    Someone asked about criteria to play a theoretical 4* PVP. There should be none. Just like PVP now there should be a 1/1/1 base level + featured boost version of the character available to anyone that wants to play.

    BRING ON LEAGUES!
  • El Satanno
    El Satanno Posts: 1,005 Chairperson of the Boards
    simonsez wrote:
    El Satanno wrote:
    For argument's sake, what would the threshold be to see the 4* events? Having one/two/three/x fully covered? Leveled? Championed?
    Maybe as soon as you fully cover one? I could see one 4* and two buffed 3*s being at least as competitive vs. 4* teams, as non-5* players are in the current scheme of things.

    I suppose covering one would be enough to see the competition, but might it not yet be discouraging as your competition will surely be rolling deeper than that? This is especially painful if you are unfortunate to fully cover Loser Hulk first. icon_cry.gif

    I kinda think it all boils down to the 5* tier breaking everything. Of course, if we're speculating a 4* tier of event, it might make good sense to ban 5* from the 3* tourneys. So you'd have the events as they are now sans 5*, and a 4* edition as the NHB event.
  • Slarow
    Slarow Posts: 204 Tile Toppler
    GritsNGravy wrote:
    Slarow wrote:
    You don't need a separate PVP. You simply need to make it so there is a featured 4* each pvp in addition to the featured 3*. The center character on your team can be either the loaner 3* (same as now), your own 3* (same as now), or your own 4* featured (new). That's it. It would allow full 4* teams to play, and would bridge the current gap between 5*'s and everyone below them. 1*/2*/low 3* teams would not see these teams, as they would be too high level for them, so it wouldn't impact early-stage gameplay at all.
    I really like this, the one tweak I'd add to make sure high level rosters don't just ditch their 3* roster. Make it progression based. Until you hit say 1000, you only play with the featured 3*. After hitting 1000 and getting the 4* reward, that character is the featured 4* you need to play with after that. You could even theme it as a tag team battle or something. Obviously the progression reward structure might need to be tweaked, but you could then expand that to 5* land with a 2000 progression or something.
    I don't think that would be necessary, since you need your 3*'s for PVE/DDQ, and if you don't have the featured 4* (or a somewhat covered one), you would be stuck with the 3* loaner.
  • The Bob The
    The Bob The Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    So many good suggestions here! Let me make my own pitch...

    There are plenty of rewards-based arguments for 4* PVP, but I'd like to see it for how it would create Problems. Note that capital "P" - I'm talking about puzzle-based Problems that must be addressed. These make the game fun - sometimes awesomely, sometimes maddeningly - in how they force you (to varying degrees) out of your box.*

    Think back on these most recent PVPs. Required Blade and required Spidey are the WORST, right? Either you're gonna bleed, or it's gonna take FOREVER. Believe it or not, though, these are good problems because they must be dealt with. That doesn't mean you can't still bull through with your OMLs and your Icemans and your Short Pants and what have you, get off my lawn, but the problem persists in every match.

    (For contrast, I'd put up heroics as a ... well, let's say "less good" problem. In this case, rather than facing a persistent problem with your full range of tools, you are faced with changing problems and limited to only certain tools, which may not be up to the job. If I'm a good enough carpenter, I can build a variety of things with my toolbox, but take away all my hammers and it might just not be possible. Also I'm not union, which is a whole thing).

    So: Problems. Imagine Cho PVP rolling around now that people actually have him covered (they all LAUGHED). Imagine Star Lord, or IW, every match. True, this may sound like hell to you rather than heaven, but each requires you (and the people you talk with) to crack the code if you want to play optimally. That's what makes it a puzzle. And the other nice thing about PVP is the problem duration is short (2.5 days), so if you really can't hack it, something else will be along soon. I like anything that drops a new range of (solvable) puzzles in front of me, and that's a big part of why I'd like to see 4* PVP.

    * If you really can't stomach my use of "fun" here, swap in "challenging" or "engaging" to get the same basic essence of what I'm saying.
  • jobob
    jobob Posts: 680 Critical Contributor
    I would love to see 4* PVP. Maybe when 6* start rolling out, it'll happen.

    Seriously though, we need more variation in PVP in general.
  • Konman
    Konman Posts: 410 Mover and Shaker
    What would be the point of a 4* centric PVP? What problem would it alleviate? Instead of being forced to occasionally use **** 3*s, you'll be forced to occasionally use **** 4*s?
  • UNC_Samurai
    UNC_Samurai Posts: 402 Mover and Shaker
    Run the event like a lightning round, so it doesn't count for the season, and focus on large ISO prizes in the reward structure.
  • TxMoose
    TxMoose Posts: 4,319 Chairperson of the Boards
    Konman wrote:
    What would be the point of a 4* centric PVP? What problem would it alleviate? Instead of being forced to occasionally use **** 3*s, you'll be forced to occasionally use **** 4*s?
    the assumption is that the rewards would scale up too (not sure that's a safe assumption). unless the rewards significantly scale, I'm not sure I'm all for it. although I only have a handful of 3s left to finish and I'm pretty sure they'll implement it right after I'm done, rendering my last few months of iso mostly wasted.

Categories