4* PvP option

therightwaye
therightwaye Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
edited June 2017 in MPQ General Discussion
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?

4* PvP option 119 votes

Yay
83% 99 votes
Nay
16% 20 votes
«13

Comments

  • Magic
    Magic Posts: 1,199 Chairperson of the Boards
    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. 
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    You're totally right, we should never, ever run 4* PVPs again.

    Just think of the children.

  • optimus2861
    optimus2861 Posts: 1,233 Chairperson of the Boards
    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.
  • Tony_Foot
    Tony_Foot Posts: 1,795 Chairperson of the Boards
    Nope, don't need it. Not with vaulted. The current boost on the 3* features and 20-30k health on those has it covered.
  • jackstar0
    jackstar0 Posts: 1,280 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'd want to see different prizing in each, so that if you play in 4*, there are better rewards.
  • therightwaye
    therightwaye Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
    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. 



  • therightwaye
    therightwaye Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
    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. 
  • Fightmastermpq
    Fightmastermpq Posts: 995 Critical Contributor
    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.
  • therightwaye
    therightwaye Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
    Maybe you'd have less people sniping the end if they had better choices or more balanced opponents. And therefore more filled slices. 


  • Jarvind
    Jarvind Posts: 1,684 Chairperson of the Boards
    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.
  • therightwaye
    therightwaye Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
    Its also possible you'd stop having SCL8 players filling up SCL6 and SCL7 slices. 
  • astrp3
    astrp3 Posts: 367 Mover and Shaker
    edited June 2017
    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.
  • therightwaye
    therightwaye Posts: 459 Mover and Shaker
    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.
    I wouldn't want to see both events saturated with top-end players who managed to have maxed level champed 5 :star: 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. 

  • nitefox1337
    nitefox1337 Posts: 80 Match Maker
    edited June 2017
    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.
  • Spoit
    Spoit Posts: 3,441 Chairperson of the Boards
    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?

    We've tried. Alot of us have tried. This forum was *alot* different long ago. Lemme see in game says I'm on day 1230.

    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.
  • Dragon_Nexus
    Dragon_Nexus Posts: 3,701 Chairperson of the Boards
    fmftint said:
    Not while 75% of them are inaccessible 
    This was going to be my point.

    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...

Categories