Should Falcon be a 2*?

akboyce

Moon 17 wrote:

When Ares was released, I already had a capable 3* roster and did not need him as part of my regular line-up. I was excited nonetheless to collect and level him, and though I don't really use him outside of special events I have no regrets about having him in my stable at 85.

One important thing about Ares, though, is that he's one of the few Dark Avengers we have access to. Dark Avengers teams need him to have a reasonable yellow/the best green ability in their arsenal. As a dude and an Avenger, Falcon fills no similar niche role and isn't super useful. So Falcon might not have been a good choice as a 2*; we have plenty of male characters and plenty of Avengers, so the artificial scarcity of his classifications doesn't make him desirable the way Ares' did.

That doesn't mean another 2* character couldn't be useful in the future. We don't have a lot of mutants, for instance, so a 2* mutant might be neat (although MN Mags, Classic Storm, and Astonishing Wolverine are already doing a decent job at 2*). The lady pool is pretty shallow (although most of the ladies are 2* already). They could introduce a 2* brotherhood character and make some of those old anti-brotherhood boosts marginally more useful.

In short: the usefulness of Falcon as a 2* might be limited, but 2* characters can be fun when they fill a specific role and we shouldn't write them off entirely.

Not really relevant to if he should be 2* or 3* but with Falcon we would have a Black History Month Event team. Storms, Black Panther, and Falcon are all buffed! Long way til February though.

Unknown

Really the topic isn't "should Falcon be a 2*", it should be "should there be more 2* heroes made?"

I've read the arguments on both sides, and they are both compelling. From my own viewpoint, I think there should be a few more 2*s. The current glut of 3* heroes makes the 2*---> 3* transition much more difficult. I think that is part of the reason Lazy Cap was so featured recently, because Demiurge is beginning to realize that with the number of 3* heroes currently out (and more coming), most players will hit a wall and be unable to progress further because they cannot get enough covers for their 3* heroes, tokens aren't going to do it. So they feature them enough that the semi-casual player will have at least 1 fully or near-full covered 3* hero, Lazy Cap in this case. This gives them a taste of the 3* game, as well as a toon they can level and not regret.

The reason for more 2*'s is to increase roster diversity for those in transition. It also makes it easier for those with advanced rosters to level a newer toon to 85 rather than 141. Now, why would anyone with a full roster of 141 3*s want to level a new 2* hero? Let's be honest, most persons with more than three lvl 141 heroes are addicted to this game, and would have no qualms levelling a 2*. Plus, 2* are often boosted in PvE events, both to equilibrate their skills with 3* heroes and also to allow those with 2* rosters a better chance to compete. More 2* heroes will give those same players a larger roster to choose from.

Will more 2* heroes dilute the token pool and make it more difficult to get the 2* covers needed? Yes and no. Factually, it will dilute the pool, but because the 3* pool is so diluted already, it will make it no worse. Using Falcon as an example, if Falcon would have been made a 2*, he would get covered quicker than at his current 3* level..... 2* tokens are a lot easier to get, 2* covers roll a lot more often than 3*, and LRs now give out 2* covers like candy. Now for someone making the 2* to 3* transition....would they rather have a 1/1/1 3* Falcon that is just going to sit on their increasingly growing roster of partially-covered 3* heroes, or will they rather have a 1/1/1 2* Falcon they will actually have a chance of getting covers for and actually using?

I'm not saying we need a bunch more 2* heroes, but certainly a few more wouldn't hurt, and it would be nice to have an easier time levelling some of these "borderline" heroes to 85 rather than 141. This is most obvious with the low hp 3* heroes recently introduced...Human Torch and Falcon. Both, at lvl 141, have only slightly more hit points than Ares. Their abilities could have been scaled to have been slightly less effective, but still useful as an 85, just like Ares is. And when buffed for events, they would rival the standard 3* heroes. Remember, with every new 3* hero introduced, that's less chance of getting a cover of a 3* hero you really want or need. How many of us would give up 10 Daredevil covers for just 1 Lazy Thor cover? I know I would. The only true benefactor of increasing the number of 3* heroes is Demiurge, because it increases the chance someone will spend money to buy covers, and it means they can control which heroes we will get to level, since it's near impossible to cover a specific hero with tokens only.

Also, to increase the value of 2* heroes, they should introduce a 2* only-tournament, just like there 1* tournament. It would give those with smaller rosters a fighting chance, and it would promote play of heroes that don't see as much playtime. 2*s are far from worthless, I still use OBW, Storm, Ares, Thor, NM Mag, and others when they are buffed. I would do the same with other new 2*s as long as they had use, which Falcon seems to have even if he was a 2*.