What happened to 4* PVP?

Jexman

The Shield Rank solution seems good to me: use it to permit different events for different tiers. Maybe there aren't enough 4/5* players to support that? 

AXP_isme

Having 3 and 4 star PvPs side by side would just fracture the player base. Think of it now where you can only queue six different players then imagine that becoming an even smaller pool and with fewer rewards to go around. 

Opening up matchmaking between the two leads to a scenario where 2/3 star rosters break MMR having seen only 3* opponents and then, out of the blue, get beaten down by rosters they can’t even begin to compete with. 

If i’m a 3* player I see myself getting stronger as my set of 3* covers grow. It takes such a long time to cover 4*s that you would be discouraged even more of the time with 4* PvPs being more frequent. 

I’m not sure there’s a neat problem to this solution. All the points above get part of the way but without a fairly drastic overhaul of the existing systems of PvP i’m not sure there’s a silver bullet forthcoming. 

smkspy

Jexman said:

The Shield Rank solution seems good to me: use it to permit different events for different tiers. Maybe there aren't enough 4/5* players to support that? 

Yeah, cause we've been run off, lol.

DAZ0273

The solution that would have given us the possibility of 4* PvP for more newer players was vaulting. That worked too well as the meta of R4G/Medusa/Gamora shows. Now with full on dilution back, 4* PvP is very much a case of the haves vs have nots.

I remember the first 4* PvP where I had the featured character championed was Luke Cage's one last year. I busted my butt to get him champed in time and had a marvelous time wreaking havok against loaner Luke's and underlevelled ones. It cannot be stated enough how much having a champed boosted 4* matters as the essential, it is a massive advantage. At the same time, I can imagine how little fun it might be to be on the end of the stomping. Even though we have wins based PvP, I suspect many players are still happy to use points to reach goals as it is generally faster. Trying to slog through 40 wins would be tough.

So this is a tough one.

madsalad

God forbid they run 3* and 4* PVP against each other. Lord knows we don't have enough characters in the game to support that or anything. And, we don't want people to have an ability to play in a 3* and 4* PVP at the same time and gain TOO much iso/rewards.  UNHEARD OF! SCANDAL they will all say! They are only looking out for our best interest! Don't want people to spend too much time in the game!  Go outside! Get a life! Don't contemplate how bad supports are and that there is no way to gain enough Riso to level one up to max, let alone the 20 2* supports you have (because 5* supports are more rare than 5* champs!).

/rant

wymtime

IceIX said:

The problem with specialist Versus events during seasons is that there's a greater chance of a given player not having the roster depth to take advantage of them. It's one thing to have to use a loaner for one position, it's another to be in No Man's Land without developed enough characters to take part even if you could battle normally at the 3-star tier. Remember, while there are quite a few players living in full 4-star and 5-star land, there are legions more building their rosters through 2 and 3. Running specialty events during a time where you're trying to compete for high placement doesn't feel great when a certain event means you just can't run it. I can't say that that situation will never change, but it's a large part of our thinking for how Versus seasons play out at current.

For the 3/3/3 loaners, I'll bring it up but obviously can't make any promises.

Ice thanks for jumping on and giving some insight.  I can imagine PVP engagement is one of the biggest items the devs discuss as it is a major part of the game and has low engagement from 2-4* players.  I would recommend thinking back to when PVP was stronger with the entire player base before the 5* tier.  Number 1 it was easier to punch up with the booster characters.  Number 2 MMR was more open so you could find easier opponents.  Number 3 rewards in PVP were actually much better than PVE.  In PVP you could grow your roster significantly faster than PVE.  
Today PVE rewards are easier to get and significantly better.  Scaling in PVE is much better so fights are easier based on CL.  It is significantly harder to punch up in PVP.

things I would recomend is to increase rewards in PVP to come closer or match PVE.  Number 2 would be to increase the levels of boosted 3* and 4* in PVP to see if you can let more players can take on higher level teams. On 4* PVP I also like the idea of giving a loaner 3,3,3 to give more people an opportunity.

cschwinge

As a player who PvP'd a TON, and has all the 3's champed and no 4's champed, I can tell you that 4* PvP is terrible for people like me, and probably even less fun for people in the middle of the 3* transition. Here is why:

The loaner is usually too low level to tank compared to a champed 3*, removing the advantage of having full health every match. He's also fairly worthless in general. Most times I would rather have one of my champed 3* instead

The opponents that aren't using a loaner are much more powerful. My champed/boosted 3* L300 isn't that much worse than the 3* L350 of a higher roster. But now I'm facing off against not just 2 other high level 4*, but also against a third *boosted* 4*

So, think about that. My team is straight up worse, and other teams who have a usable essential are much better. Why would a put myself through that, other than as an annoying grind for rewards by wins?

A 3/3/3 loaner was an idea I floated back when they announced more 4* PvP, and I was rebuffed by people with high level rosters who thought I should be happy with the 1/1/1 loaner. After playing it, I think it should really be a 4/4/4 loaner that's at least L290 (after boosting). The 4* loaner **NEEDS** to be as powerful as the champed/boosted 3* that it's replacing

And I think a more powerful 4* will drive player engagement. The chance to play with a fully powered 4* for a couple of days is FUN. It could make players want to drive towards the 4* tier

thedarkphoenix

There just needs to be more options.

Its really that simple, people will queue up for what they can fight comfortably over what they have no chance at getting.

sirwookieechris

I think a 3/3/3 loaner 4* would be a good idea. High enough that it is useful to get a grasp for the character and have fun with it, but not high enough that it is strategic to use the loaner over your own since it gets healed after every match.

The rockett

So explain this to me.  In the current PVE, the loaner node is level 191 Emma Frost with a 4/4/5 build base level of 86.  If the blue print is already live in the game then why switch it?  Maybe this needs to be updated. 

cschwinge said:

As a player who PvP'd a TON, and has all the 3's champed and no 4's champed, I can tell you that 4* PvP is terrible for people like me, and probably even less fun for people in the middle of the 3* transition. Here is why:

The loaner is usually too low level to tank compared to a champed 3*, removing the advantage of having full health every match. He's also fairly worthless in general. Most times I would rather have one of my champed 3* instead

The opponents that aren't using a loaner are much more powerful. My champed/boosted 3* L300 isn't that much worse than the 3* L350 of a higher roster. But now I'm facing off against not just 2 other high level 4*, but also against a third *boosted* 4*

So, think about that. My team is straight up worse, and other teams who have a usable essential are much better. Why would a put myself through that, other than as an annoying grind for rewards by wins?

A 3/3/3 loaner was an idea I floated back when they announced more 4* PvP, and I was rebuffed by people with high level rosters who thought I should be happy with the 1/1/1 loaner. After playing it, I think it should really be a 4/4/4 loaner that's at least L290 (after boosting). The 4* loaner **NEEDS** to be as powerful as the champed/boosted 3* that it's replacing

And I think a more powerful 4* will drive player engagement. The chance to play with a fully powered 4* for a couple of days is FUN. It could make players want to drive towards the 4* tier

Ok.  I get this but the. What if you are a 2* player that has all the 2* champed but no 3* champed doesn’t this local apply to them too?  You can talk about this on every level of the game.   If it is the 5E node in PVE when this came out, 4* PVPs or if you are a 2* player with 3* pvps. They will always be a level that you might not be able to compete in at a higher level.  

BoyWonder1914

IceIX said:

The problem with specialist Versus events during seasons is that there's a greater chance of a given player not having the roster depth to take advantage of them. It's one thing to have to use a loaner for one position, it's another to be in No Man's Land without developed enough characters to take part even if you could battle normally at the 3-star tier. Remember, while there are quite a few players living in full 4-star and 5-star land, there are legions more building their rosters through 2 and 3. Running specialty events during a time where you're trying to compete for high placement doesn't feel great when a certain event means you just can't run it. I can't say that that situation will never change, but it's a large part of our thinking for how Versus seasons play out at current.

For the 3/3/3 loaners, I'll bring it up but obviously can't make any promises.

IceIX said:

To head off some obvious questions:

Wait! What about new 4-Stars! This means they’re going to be harder to get!
Sort of. By putting the Latest 12 into the general 4-Star bunch, this cuts down on their relative odds. However, since we’ll be able to run 4-Star Versus runs more often and Stores tend to be more focused than Vaults, the change isn’t as large as it looks at the outset. Plus, the overall odds of 4-Star rarities are going up pretty much everywhere, so you’ll be pulling more in aggregate.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Ice, now that you've essentially confirmed this to no longer be a thing, is there going to be a new proposed answer for addressing 4-star pack dilution and acquiring newer-released characters? Even for the currently existing 4-star PVP for newer characters, we are given a "___ & Friends/Foes" VAULT, not a store that is featuring these increased odds. 

Tony_Foot

Are people actually having trouble covering the new ones? They seem to be running plenty of progression awards for them and I just use bonus heroes while pulling heroics and have almost finished iron spider and he’s not been in the tokens 2 months.

Im a T50 pve player so wasn’t winning them in release pve and haven’t pulled any LTS either as I’m hoarding and they are still easily achieved in 8 weeks or less.

Bowgentle

Tony_Foot said:

Are people actually having trouble covering the new ones? They seem to be running plenty of progression awards for them and I just use bonus heroes while pulling heroics and have almost finished iron spider and he’s not been in the tokens 2 months.

Im a T50 pve player so wasn’t winning them in release pve and haven’t pulled any LTS either as I’m hoarding and they are still easily achieved in 8 weeks or less.

It's not about covering them, it's getting them to meaningful champ levels.
Sure I've covered Iron Spider, but he's 272 while my 4* average is in the 340+ range.
He's never going to be usable.

Tony_Foot

How was still having latest going to change that? Even when I opened 320 latest I was lucky to add 15 levels to a latest four star. How many levels were you adding via draws while they were in latest? How many pulls could you do during that cycle?

But yeah I see your point about on going dilution.

Bowgentle

Tony_Foot said:

How was still having latest going to change that? Even when I opened 320 latest I was lucky to add 15 levels to a latest four star. How many levels were you adding via draws while they were in latest? How many pulls could you do during that cycle?

But yeah I see your point about on going dilution.

I average about 5 latest pulls per day.

Chars who were in tokens while the 3:1 ratio was in effect range from 350 to max-champed.

It really let you add levels. A lot of levels.

sambrookjm

Tony_Foot said:

How was still having latest going to change that? Even when I opened 320 latest I was lucky to add 15 levels to a latest four star. How many levels were you adding via draws while they were in latest? How many pulls could you do during that cycle?

But yeah I see your point about on going dilution.

Would it make a big difference going from 320 to 275?  No.  At that rate of pulls, you're going to get your characters champed, no matter what the pull rate is.

Does it make a big difference between someone going from 280-ish to only having six or seven covers?  You better believe it.  My Iron Spider and 4-star Black Widow are both some permutation of 2/2/3, while my average four star is probably about 285; XFW is the only one above LVL 300, and he's at 301.

As for heroes that were stil in favored when dilution kicked back in, Panther, Shuri and Valkyrie are either one or two covers away from getting to #13, but I can just about guarantee you that without the dilution those three would be champed right now.

One solution would be to have 10 and 15 CP tokens for four stars only.  The 15 CP would only have the latest four stars, while the 10 CP would have all of them at the same rate.  Whales are gonna whale regardless, so they'll have the heroes maxed out very quickly.  The newer people, who come by CP at a slower rate, would be able to get the newer heroes covered quicker.

alaeth

My vote if have 3* and 4* in parallel.  Once you join one, you're locked in.

But given the horrible attrition at the top-end, I highly doubt the devs would go for that.

Maybe by SCL?  7-9 are 4*, 6 and lower are 3* ?