Hate Hate Hate required characters in PvE

erakbgg

I'm sure I'm far from the first to complain about this, but I can't stand PvE events that require 3-star characters I don't have (especially new ones like Lazy Thor). What makes this worse is when the PvE's rewards include yet another new character. I feel like I can't get a foot in the door! It'd be better if you let us have a low-level temporary character if our roster's missing that particular guy.

(Also, slow down on the new characters! Or at least introduce more 2-star characters. I've been playing for 3 months and the only new 2-star character introduced in that time was Ares.)

Unknown

There are certain PvE nodes labeled "Team up" and these nodes do give you a loaner copy of the required character. However, the real reward for doing well in a PvE isn't just getting the character but knowing that he'll give you a leg up in an upcoming tourney by giving access to exclusive nodes. Rubberbanding makes it so that the leg up isn't insurmountable for other players, but does make it easier to score moderately well, and enables you to compete for the highest levels.

I can say that the extra bonus isn't insurmountable b/c my alt account doe not have the required character and is currently in 86th place, well inside the range needed to get the Torch. My highest character there is a 2* Thor in his 50's, and I'm not playing optimally on that account.

Like it or not, those "required" nodes are most likely here to say.

Unknown

The only time it's driven me absolutely nuts was the first two Hulk PVEs, before I had a Punisher, meaning I couldn't do Punisher required missions, meaning I couldn't get enough points to get Punisher. Infuriatingly circular. Since then, it's been more that you earn something in one event you need in the next, which means not getting one of them is kind of terrifying.

Unknown

They're required for some nodes, but they're not necessary. I still remember Invisible Woman was required for a node in a past tournament, but still placed in the second tier reward list even though I didn't have her, despite her being required for many of the nodes. They help, but they're not going to get you to the top of the brackets anymore than you would without them. It's all about consistency and multiple playthroughs to rack up points.

erakbgg

Fair enough. I think my rage is greater this PvE than the last because it seems all the "Essential" (thus, most valuable ones) are all Modern Thor required. I'll keep a watch on my standings.

Great to finally know what "Team Up" means!

Dormammu

I like the 'essential' nodes. It gives me a reason to hold onto and build covers I might not otherwise care about. I would probably sell Lazy Cap covers if I didn't know he'd often be essential for certain PvE nodes or buffed for other tournaments. I'll still never max him, there are better 3* priorities in my opinion, but I might work him up to lvl 50-75 so that he's viable when required or buffed.

I should have named myself The_Collector...

firethorne

I'm not a fan of essential rounds either. I posted some of my concerns on this thread. I had made my way to second place by doing only these essential matches.

Ultimately, I think my problem with these is that it gives such a big advantage when I don't want to be competing with other players in PvE in the first place. And if I must then I'd rather it be fair and have all players be able to do all levels, even if I happen to have that character.

Giving a big powered up buff is advantage enough. They don't need to lock have-nots out of half the points.

Zifna

I like the required characters in PvE - it gives you a reason to value your whole roster and play people you wouldn't otherwise play.

BUT

I don't like this "Release one character a week, require that character next week" thing they've been doing lately. I feel like if I have a busy week where I can't play MPQ, I'm potentially behind for the whole next month.

They should ease up a little somehow. Maybe 2 chances to get a character before he's required?

_RiO_

Zifna wrote:

I like the required characters in PvE - it gives you a reason to value your whole roster and play people you wouldn't otherwise play.

BUT

I don't like this "Release one character a week, require that character next week" thing they've been doing lately. I feel like if I have a busy week where I can't play MPQ, I'm potentially behind for the whole next month.

They should ease up a little somehow. Maybe 2 chances to get a character before he's required?

Maybe not park all the locked missions behind the same essential character...

DrNitroman

Dormammu wrote:

I like the 'essential' nodes. It gives me a reason to hold onto and build covers I might not otherwise care about.

Zifna wrote:

I like the required characters in PvE - it gives you a reason to value your whole roster and play people you wouldn't otherwise play.

This.
And I find it nice that investing some time in an event give you a little advantage in another event. I add that this advantage is not reserved to hardcore players as new character covers rather require to score top 75, or even top 100 players in a week-long event (bracketed, of course). A daily player may achieve that and I feel like MPQ rewards his involved players.

Conversely, I understand that one might say that this mechanism is frustrating when you start the game. It's true, but this frustration of the beginning allows to have later a real sensation of progression when you keep playing.

I remember, playing the Hunt (second one, featuring Ares). I had hard times to keep a decent score as I was hardly transitioning from * to ** and the only buffed character in my roster was Captain America. Then a lucky token brought me one Punisher cover which was required for some nodes. This only one cover was a great help and I even scored my first top 10 ... winning several Ares covers that strengthen my roster and so on... I was so happy to pull this Punisher cover! I think it's important to maintain this progression.

_RiO_

DrNitroman wrote:

I remember, playing the Hunt (second one, featuring Ares). I had hard times to keep a decent score as I was hardly transitioning from * to ** and the only buffed character in my roster was Captain America. Then a lucky token brought me one Punisher cover which was required for some nodes. This only one cover was a great help and I even scored my first top 10 ... winning several Ares covers that strengthen my roster and so on... I was so happy to pull this Punisher cover! I think it's important to maintain this progression.

You do realize that without the "essential character" mechanic, you wouldn't have had to pull that Punisher to maintain that level of progression, right?

DrNitroman

What I meant is that I like that some mechanisms highlight a few steps of progression within the game (or the metagame).
At the beginning, you can't enter these essential fights. Later, when you can, you know that you have made some progress, that you have a better roster. I like to have some objectives that keep me playing.

But I can understand that you think this mechanism is broken or unfair. Note that I'm only playing for 90 days but I feel that I have been able to build my roster stronger at a regular pace without encountering any real wall.