How would you feel if PvP was limited to 4* and below only?

jackstar0

Would you find this equally boring as some 4* meta crept to the top, or would the potential variety in your queue and for your own play make it worthwhile?

Daredevil217

Neutral/don’t care. 

jackstar0

I would enjoy that.

Not an option!






[smile emoji]

Flydecoder

I would LOVE that... or attach limits to the levels... Level 9... up to 2 5 stat
Level 8 up to 1-4 &1-5
Level 7 up to 2x level 4... etc...

HoundofShadow

Quickly add in a neutral option before this thread gets close. It happened a lot of times already. Anyway, I would say yes even though I'm still in 3* land.

Phumade

I would enjoy that.

Specifically,  I'd love an event where I could use just my 4* roster + the normal events where I can use my 5* roster.  Ideally, each event should run concurrently

Tony_Foot

Even better limit it to one 5 star so the four stars become relevant and the great team ups between a certain 5 star and four stars become useful.  

Kind of combined arms arms for the season because that pvp has the most diversity.

Scofie

I would not enjoy that.

In theory it would be great. But as I'm facing mainly 4* already, I get the feeling we'd just see max champed 4* in all the best characters you contend with. I'd let 5* land have its own party and I'll just carry on as usual in 4* land, oblivious to it all and unlikely to be invited any time soon. 

broll

I would not enjoy that.

No.  Why should the game punish those that put in a lot of effort and most likely IRL money into getting 5*s?

I wouldn't mind having something like this every once in a while, but not every time, not even frequently.

Daredevil217 said:

Neutral/don’t care. 

jackstar0 said:

Not an option!






[smile emoji]

Following the forum rules isn't an option?  This thread won't last long....

Daiches

I would not enjoy that.

It would collapse the game economy. Why strive to collect characters that are locked out of the end game mode?
Unless you want them to add it as an extra mode next to normal pvp, that doesn't count for season/has a seperate season?

aesthetocyst

I would not enjoy that.

Sounds like BoP.

As an event, or a stricture applied to low SCLs, maybe.

But baby 5*s are helpful on young rosters.

I'd rather the devs focus on releasing balanced characters and moderating the power creep.

Daredevil217

jackstar0 said:

Not an option!






[smile emoji]

To be clear I’m a 4* player so I don’t use my 5s anyway. So I don’t care either way. I mean I guess I could level my 5s without fear under this system, but it’ll never happen. 

ZeroKarma

I would not enjoy that.

I could see something like this if it were limited to a specific event or cl. But to make the revenue drivers for the game useless for half of the content would destroy this game very quickly. 

Only way this works is cl7 and below are 3* PvP with no 5*, and cl8-10 are 4* PvP. 

Dormammu

Um, I am a 4-star player. So I guess I'd be cool with it? Then again, I do like feasting on 3-star player's under-covered fives they always seem to use, elevating them to my MMR.

Consider me right in the middle.

Shintok17

I would not enjoy that.

I use soft capped Lv 270 5*'s for match damage to complement my small collection of six 4* champs. So I would not enjoy it since I don't have many 4* champs to use in boosted weeks. I already have to deal with champed boosted 4*'s for my level of MMR at higher point ranges and ranks in PVP so I don't want all of the matches to be this way.

animaniactoo

The only way I could see that is if the PVPs were segregated. In fact, I would very much enjoy this kind of segregation:

Featured 3* - only 3* & below available to use.
Featured 4* - only 4* & below available to use.
Featured 5* - only 5* & below available to use.

However, to be honest, being able to choose an SCL to compete at should push towards that kind of segregation anyway - regardless of who is featured. That it doesn't work that way is one of the more nonsensical setups in the game.

jackstar0

I would enjoy that.

broll said:

Following the forum rules isn't an option?  This thread won't last long....

DD is in my alliance and I didn't know that was a rule for polls.

Thanks to everyone who has voted and contributed to all the discussion.

It was just an idea that I have. I've got I think 15+ 5* Champs, but Gambit still keeps a lot of the meta focused around him, which keeps PvP pretty static. I expect if/when Gambit is nerfed some new character will be released that starts the meta-warp all over again. Meanwhile the 4* tier enjoys a ton of variety and more new characters added regularly to encourage that variety.

smkspy

I'd rather they run 4 star essential pvps, maybe one for one with 3 star pvps.

I feel like my fours have become useless since moving into the 5 star tier.

Kevmcg

I would enjoy that.

The 4* and under can be an occasional change of pace. Those with 5* do want to use them, just not all the time.

Anything to add variety. Use the team designations - only heroes, only villains, Guardians, X-Men, etc...

And why not do this for Lightning Rounds? Getting stale.

Calnexin

I would enjoy that.

I don't support removing 5* from PvP play entirely, but I would really like to see tiered events where you have an option to restrict your own roster, and therefore the opponents you see.  The rewards should be turned down so that the 5*-heavy rosters have incentive to use the characters they've bought, hoarded, or earned through hard work and the devil's luck.

It wouldn't solve high-end PvP, unfortunately.  The monotony at that tier would remain absent other revisions.  But at least those at that tier have the option to downgrade prizes in exchange for more varied play.

Scofie

I would not enjoy that.

 It's interesting: I'd like to believe that people valued playing more than winning but my experience of player behaviour over the last 4 years tells me that isn't necessarily the case. The temptation to just chuck a 5* champ or 2 in "just to make sure" probably trumps trying a new 4* team. So it won't work if it's optional. 

I tried a new team the other day that I thought would work well. It was a gamble and I did win but if it had been a relatively even match and I was aiming for any sort of placement, I certainly wouldn't have bothered.