4* PvP option
![therightwaye](https://us.v-cdn.net/6029755/uploads/userpics/017/nT6M7689UNXGA.jpg)
therightwaye
Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
I think it's about time to add a second set of PvP. One with mandatory 3 star like we currently play. But add another tier with mandatory 4 star. Have them run at the same time but only allow one tier playable per player. A choice would be nice.
Yay? Nay?
Yay? Nay?
4* PvP option 119 votes
Yay
83%
99 votes
Nay
16%
20 votes
2
Comments
-
With the amount of 4* in the game the 3* PvP should go away and be replaced by 4* PvP. Each of the 4* had a PvP release event. The code is there. Just push the switch.0
-
mexus said:Magic said:With the amount of 4* in the game the 3* PvP should go away and be replaced by 4* PvP. Each of the 4* had a PvP release event. The code is there. Just push the switch.
You mean the ones who can use the loaner and only get matched up with other newer players, anyway?7 -
You're totally right, we should never, ever run 4* PVPs again.
Just think of the children.
4 -
Not while 75% of them are inaccessible10
-
Side-by-side should've been done quite some time ago, with appropriate reward structures for each, and whether you can enter only one, or both, I don't know; you could make an argument for either.
2 -
I'd want to see different prizing in each, so that if you play in 4*, there are better rewards.
2 -
Running a 3* and a 4* PvP concurrently where you can only join one or the other, and the 4* PvP has better rewards, would do wonders for lower level rosters who always complain that they can't get higher that 600 or so without being stomped on by champed 4*s or 5*s. You could even ban 5*s ( and maybe 4*s over a certain level?) from the 3* pvp to prevent griefing the newbie tier.7
-
I really don't see why you need to have better rewards. Giving me a choice is more reward than I need. I like choices. Also, I just get sick of the same cycle of PvP battles. The game is already very repetitive.
Choice is always better. Variety is always better. Facing different opponents would be better.
1 -
Another thought I've been having is I'd like to see PvP lock characters. It would really give me more to think about.
If I joined a PvP with three characters that was high rewarding but I couldn't use those three characters in other PvP or PvE matches would be a very fun different kind of game. It would also be another reason to use some of the characters I have champed that don't do anything.
And maybe force some health pack usage in a fair manner that appeased the MPQ overlords.0 -
I don't like the idea of having to pick which event to compete in. We are struggling to fill SCL8 brackets as it is, doubling them wouldn't help. If 4* PvP were to become a thing I'd like to see them run in place of current 3* events. Maybe just replace the vaulted 3* events with 4* ones.0
-
Maybe you'd have less people sniping the end if they had better choices or more balanced opponents. And therefore more filled slices.
1 -
I'm in favor of this if only because I'm always using two boosted fourstars, which in the overwhelming majority of cases makes the forced 3* member feel like a burden. A handful of them can compete if they're maxchamped or nearly so - my maxed Black Panther was clearing 10k AOE with his black in his last event - but for the most part they're basically just acting as a human shield for my far more valuable 4* team members.
Obviously this won't be the case for people in the 3* transition, though frankly I'm not sure using a 4* loaner would be all that bad. You won't be hitting 1200, obviously, but 575 should be achievable, which is no different from how it is now.0 -
Its also possible you'd stop having SCL8 players filling up SCL6 and SCL7 slices.1
-
I voted yes, but I don't like the idea of limiting players to one or the other. I'd rather be able to play in whichever ones I wanted, including playing in both the 3* and 4* at the same time. Since I play every event, I'd probably do both most of the time, even if only for the "thanks for playing" rewards.1
-
astrp3 said:I voted yes, but I don't like the idea of limiting players to one or the other. I'd rather be able to play in whichever ones I wanted, including playing in both the 3* and 4* at the same time. Since I play every event, I'd probably do both most of the time, even if only for the "thanks for playing" rewards.
characters. You've already have that with each SCL bracket 6, 7, 8.
I would hope that more choice would give more room for players to compete.
4 -
mexus said:There came the sarcasm.
Before I came to this forum I had problems with recognizing sarcasm but I've learned better since.
Why not, instead of being sarcastic to me, teach me in what way I'm wrong in my assumptions?
The forum two years ago there seemed (true we always are more fond of the past) to be more tolerance of how the game worked and we all had difficulties. However, there weren't constant "Open letter to the devs" & "I've got the solution to MPQ because I'm a part time game designer".
I remember when my roster was growing getting horribly beat down in PvP. My roster developed over time and PvP became easier. We also had 2.5 hour pve refreshes that we had to set alarms for.
It's not lost on us vets that it's harder to develop a roster now because of the number of characters and more players.
But...this constant whining that is just so prevalent brings out the sarcasm. Many here seem the game should just flow participation trophies. Many think a kick butt roster should be developed in 60 days with zero $$. It's not how this game works. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a mobile free to play game that doesn't have pay and or time issues to progress.
Anyway, ramble mode over.11 -
The PvP System, is pushing away any new comers as far as it can with each of its aspects.
A "star" based access to an event woult be a good start to clear some of the confusion up.
3 star PvP event: only 3 stars heroes.
4 star PvP event: only 4 stars heroes.
etc...
This would clarify challenges and show players where they stand with their Roster and make PvP way more accessible.
Veterans should definitely be cleaned from the lower Ranks.
PS: What they should consider too is to bring separate H.Packs for PvP and PvE. What I mean is that PvP is already out of range for most players since they will never have enough h.packs to compete in both PvE and PvP.
1 -
acescracked said:mexus said:There came the sarcasm.
Before I came to this forum I had problems with recognizing sarcasm but I've learned better since.
Why not, instead of being sarcastic to me, teach me in what way I'm wrong in my assumptions?
The forum two years ago there seemed (true we always are more fond of the past) to be more tolerance of how the game worked and we all had difficulties. However, there weren't constant "Open letter to the devs" & "I've got the solution to MPQ because I'm a part time game designer".
I remember when my roster was growing getting horribly beat down in PvP. My roster developed over time and PvP became easier. We also had 2.5 hour pve refreshes that we had to set alarms for.
It's not lost on us vets that it's harder to develop a roster now because of the number of characters and more players.
But...this constant whining that is just so prevalent brings out the sarcasm. Many here seem the game should just flow participation trophies. Many think a kick butt roster should be developed in 60 days with zero $$. It's not how this game works. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a mobile free to play game that doesn't have pay and or time issues to progress.
Anyway, ramble mode over.
That's a very different forum that I remember. The only character change (read: nerf) that didn't get a massive outcry was Loki.
Probably because IceIX was a better community manager when he was just doing it in his off-time between actual dev tasks.
1 -
fmftint said:Not while 75% of them are inaccessible
How many PvPs are going to rely on loaners because you cannoy earn the character reliably? How many people are going to have a huge advantage in Hulk Buster or Jean Grey or Thor or Ice Man or whatever simply because they've been playing longer?
I mean, it would be nice to have a 4* PvP that gives a cover for that event at a lower poit score. That would be cool. But we're still assuming 800 points is a reasonable place to earn a 3* single cover...
2 -
QFT @acescracked. I see totally eye to eye with his statement. Today is day 1232. I voted yes on the poll but my only stipulation would be that the featured 4*s only be from vaulted 4*s. Just to create an event that rewards differently from current pve and pvp, which had been churning out 4* progression prizes from Latest 12 recently
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.9K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.3K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.7K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 508 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.4K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 99 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 424 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 300 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.7K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements