Not a novel idea brought to the forefront of discussion...aptly so (MORE boosted characters)

[Deleted User]

So, I can't recall where, since I casually browse a few of the forums to see what the chatter around town regards, but moving on, one poster made, what I consider to be, a very valid and NEVER more appropriate solution to something that I believe afflicts PvP.

That suggestion was to have MORE boosted characters each boosted period.

This makes sense on so many levels, but for those with short sight--let's flesh it out:

A. MORE INCLUSION:  how?  Not everybody has the same levels of roster maturity as the so-called whales, who have every character cover-max'ed.  So, more boosted characters would mean that, given the current trend, where only a given set of covers are boosted, taking the same rotation set and adding a fraction more for each level (4*, 3*, etc.) would mean that players lacking the current rotations might find themselves in the company of the suggested, additionally-boosted characters...this means more people should be inclined to play

B.  PvP Match Diversity:  a natural consequence of more players participating will mean that those enjoying the additionally-boosted characters would offer teams of a different variety than we currently [don't] enjoy.  Some opponents cry that we'll just see the same teams, but their argument is null and void because WE already do, it's not a matter of future tense--this is a present-moment dilemma.  More boosted characters could alleviate that and it would also entice players who find more of their roster boosted to try different team combinations.  I get sooooo tired of playing the same folks because of the "meta," which I will henceforth refer to as the trend since I speak N0Яm@L English.

C. More Enjoyability: which is immeasurable from a strict perspective of data analysis, but is naturally inferrable because, as more characters find boosts, more people will be able to participate competitively where they might ordinarily find themselves lacking given existing status quo (this is the flip side of current participation trends and how they influence some players who might opt out of specific events due to unfit rosters resulting from no boosts).  Everybody enjoys the experience when they are able to compete and singling out certain groups who may have a given boosted character really creates another social problem--that of privilege and I'm all about the capitalistic approach--survival of the fittest, but real life and MPQ.  C'mon, let's make this app, that should be a pure diversionary experience, more enjoyable, FOR MORE OF THE RIGHT REASONS.

I think the resulting diversity we'd find in PvP events would enjoy a healthy revival and much-needed change in current roster trends.


Whoever it was that suggested that recently--salute to you, sir (or madam).

Cheers!

Dapp

BigMike182

I would love it if we could choose which characters get boosted. Have, say, 8 boosted spots per tier (maybe have the 1 & 2 *s share 8 slots above SCL 5) and let the players lock in their chosen characters for the season. It's unlikely the debts would go for this, but I'd like to see it.

[Deleted User]

BigMike182 said:

I would love it if we could choose which characters get boosted. Have, say, 8 boosted spots per tier (maybe have the 1 & 2 *s share 8 slots above SCL 5) and let the players lock in their chosen characters for the season. It's unlikely the debts would go for this, but I'd like to see it.

I too have pondered the notion of pre-selecting either any cover at liberty or one of a selection and locking them in for boosted stats for a given event.  I think that would more frequently result in a static set of teams we'd see though, but it might follow the suit I predicted above if there is enough variety in the available pre-set selection to lock.

To add tho, I think something like only being able to use 1 5* in S.H.I.E.L.D. sim is fair for SCL9, or lower,  And S.H.I.E.L.D. sim would be determined (or determine) Season tier.  I think that's most desirable because in an ideal game of balance, the whales would all be in SCL9--not sniping.  Restricting use of 5*s to the highest tier of competition available seems like a no-brainer for fair competition but then again, sensibility is not a strong suit for the decision makers for game theory.

You could even do some sort of scaling for 5*s, allow use of 3 per-team in SCL 9, 2 in SCL8, etc..  I think these simple things would have quantum effects in terms of balanced competition.

something like that would give players a better expectation of competition, not like now.  If you knew your SCL only allowed 1 5* per team, e.g.--you could more intelligently select a SCL suited for your roster's fitness level.  This predictability gives player's peace of mind knowing they won't be preyed upon like it's the wild wild west with no justice for the common.

carrion_pigeons

I would really like it if the game had more total events but required you to preselect what characters could be used in which events, and no character could be used in more than one at a time.  Placement would be counted for all events together similar to a season score, except it would reset every week, but progression would be unique to each event.

Imagine how interesting it would be if instead of having to do 7 clears of one event, you only had to do 1, for (up to) seven different events, all of them with different buff lists and a requirement to do them all with different characters.  Suddenly Thanos farming is a treat you do for one clear, instead of a 7-round chore.  Suddenly, almost everyone actually needs to stretch their roster to the breaking point.  Suddenly, planning and strategy actually matter instead of the game having been solved years ago.