Are we done with 3* characters?

Borstock

I never use them, but always like them. Now that dilution makes covering new characters slower, a 3* is still a new character that I can cover and use quickly.

purplemur

Personally as a player in transition to a higher tier. I hope we get more 2&3's at the expense of 4*s
 and the release cycle goes 5/4/3/4/5. NO MORE 5/3 lazy variants! New characters not redundancy!
Remember 3* feeders = anti-dilution
New players struggle with roster slots, yes, but that struggle really gets hard when you have to save 4* covers. Some extra playable characters at 3*tier would be fun and make the transition smoother.
Which is more worthless to the playerbase as a whole: 5*Wasp/Emma/ flaptain or a new 3* like strange/thanos/SL?
Would you rather have a new 3* or a new Support to equip to a new release 5*?

offtopic: adjust the rate of 2* in Heroic tokens to yield more 3*s (and more 4's)

Felessa

Despite being a 4* player, I would like to see new 3*s too, especially because even with 47 characters, that tier still have missing color schemes (   and   ), which I think it's quite an awkward thing.

Jarvind

Felessa said:

Despite being a 4* player, I would like to see new 3*s too, especially because even with 47 characters, that tier still have missing color schemes (   and   ), which I think it's quite an awkward thing.

No no no what the game needs is more purple/green/passive characters!

Dormammu

broll said:

I sure hope so.
I also hope we're gonna be done with 4*s soon.
#SixStarsOverdue

Broll you're so naughty. Were you testing the flag waters? 

I have to agree with you on 4-stars. I think most people would. I mean, how big does this tier need to be? Not that more 3-stars are needed - I think that tier is about the size it needs to be, maybe even a little heavy. I'd rather see more 2-stars added, even though that'd be rather pointless too.

Ptahhotep

What we really need is the same number of characters in each tier. Then there could be consistent feeder lines running from the 2* level up to the 5* level.

The rockett

Ptahhotep said:

What we really need is the same number of characters in each tier. Then there could be consistent feeder lines running from the 2* level up to the 5* level.

Only issue with that is roster slot costs.  This gets very expense and at 300 it becomes 2000 HP.   

Bowgentle

Ptahhotep said:

What we really need is the same number of characters in each tier. Then there could be consistent feeder lines running from the 2* level up to the 5* level.

That is one of the worst ideas I've read on the forums, and I've read a lot of bad ideas.
Good luck adding champ levels to 60 2s.

Coubii

Angel? Since his release, I barely champed him while all my others 3* took around 20 levels. And that's include 3* characters without 2* feeder as well. He's so rare, I consider him as 3* bagman.

I would like new 3*, and 2* too. More feeder to higher tier would be nice, even if it include a little dilution. But please, don't make tinykitty dup!

DAZ0273

The problem is that creating absolutely brand new 3* characters just to exist in that tier not already in the game a.) Cost the devs money for licensing and b.) Given the ease of which 3* characters can be obtained and champed is almost impossible to monetise to pay for that licensing cost.

The previous releases meant they could monetise the 3* versions with vaults on release but in most cases only pay a single fee or a small fee on top to cover differences in the 3 & 5 versions. They know once those babies are in tokens you can bonus hero them to champ status is no time whatsoever and most players in the 3* tier and above know that also and so have reduced impetus to chase them.

broll

Ptahhotep said:

What we really need is the same number of characters in each tier. Then there could be consistent feeder lines running from the 2* level up to the 5* level.

I generally like where you're coming from.  1*s should be excluded from that since they don't have champ levels.  So 166 - 8 / 4 tiers = 39.5 characters per tier.  I'd be fine with that.  Redistribute characters from some of the over diluted tiers to under diluted ones.  What I wouldn't be fine with is 71 characters in every tier.  I'd drop the game in a heartbeat.

Honestly, as much as I hate to admit it, the only way we're likely to get a consistent level of feeders (excluding 3*s) is if/when 4* tier gets to double the side of both 3* and 5* tier.  Then you could have each 3* feed 2 4*s and double 5* feeders from 4* tier.  But that's not a good solution either because I don't want to live in a game world with ~100 character in any one tier.  4* tier needs to get capped, it's already too big.

D4Ni13

broll said:

Ptahhotep said:

What we really need is the same number of characters in each tier. Then there could be consistent feeder lines running from the 2* level up to the 5* level.

I generally like where you're coming from.  1*s should be excluded from that since they don't have champ levels.  So 166 - 8 / 4 tiers = 39.5 characters per tier.  I'd be fine with that.  Redistribute characters from some of the over diluted tiers to under diluted ones.  What I wouldn't be fine with is 71 characters in every tier.  I'd drop the game in a heartbeat.

Honestly, as much as I hate to admit it, the only way we're likely to get a consistent level of feeders (excluding 3*s) is if/when 4* tier gets to double the side of both 3* and 5* tier.  Then you could have each 3* feed 2 4*s and double 5* feeders from 4* tier.  But that's not a good solution either because I don't want to live in a game world with ~100 character in any one tier.  4* tier needs to get capped, it's already too big.

If they go that way I think the best solution is to restructure all the characters in compatible tiers, but I'm not sure they would want to do that. For me it doesn't make sense having Scarlet Witch on 3* tier and having a lesser powered character on 4* or 5* level. Sure there are other examples. 

I never liked the variant mechanic. Instead I was more into having the same hero with different builds. So lets say you like Wolverine. Instead of having 5 tiers, I would have made 5 alternate builds. You can give access to certain builds the same way you do with tiers, but having builds instead of variants would mean that you will always have the character eligible to his event or required mission and would have the option to develop or change his playstyle through different builds. 

broll

D4Ni13 said:

I never liked the variant mechanic. Instead I was more into having the same hero with different builds. So lets say you like Wolverine. Instead of having 5 tiers, I would have made 5 alternate builds. You can give access to certain builds the same way you do with tiers, but having builds instead of variants would mean that you will always have the character eligible to his event or required mission and would have the option to develop or change his playstyle through different builds. 

You're talking about an entirely different game there.  That being said I here you.  Honestly I wish they'd have gone with something like Strike Force has, were rather than having characters at each tier you boost them through the tiers by collecting more.  They could add to that a costume feature that would work like variants.  You could by different costumes that changed the appearance and possibly even modify their moves somewhat (like supports).  Then make the costume stuff almost entirely pay while the rest of the game is free.

But again that would be a different game.  If they were going to overall the game as much as either of those two suggestions they'd be better off just making MPQ 2 and starting off with those new ideas.

ThaRoadWarrior

broll said:

 Honestly I wish they'd have gone with something like Strike Force has, were rather than having characters at each tier you boost them through the tiers by collecting more.  

So you want character progression to work like support progression does?

sambrookjm

Jarvind said:

Quebbster said:

I have all 47 threestars maxchamped now. I certainly wouldn't mind a 48th threestar, I don't really know what to do with my 3* bonus heroes now.

Personally I just leave all my 3s unfavorited. You just get random covers when you get a BH that way.

I just go with whichever one needs covers for the 3-star farm.  Right now, it's my 3/1/3 Spider Man.  When he gets his 13th good cover, I'll seel the max champed Spidey, champ the new one, and likely switch the favorite over to Squirrel Girl (currently 0/0/2).

Quebbster

sambrookjm said:

Jarvind said:

Quebbster said:

I have all 47 threestars maxchamped now. I certainly wouldn't mind a 48th threestar, I don't really know what to do with my 3* bonus heroes now.

Personally I just leave all my 3s unfavorited. You just get random covers when you get a BH that way.

I just go with whichever one needs covers for the 3-star farm.  Right now, it's my 3/1/3 Spider Man.  When he gets his 13th good cover, I'll seel the max champed Spidey, champ the new one, and likely switch the favorite over to Squirrel Girl (currently 0/0/2).

Yeah, right now Angel is my 3* bonus hero since he is 5/5/2 with many greens and blues on the vine (why did DDQ give out green instead of black?). Not that it really matters with saved covers, but it would be nice to get the replacement started properly. I am also rebuilding Elektra, Gambit and Star-Lord, so all Three could become bonus heroes once Angel gets to level 167.

jamesh

DAZ0273 said:

The problem is that creating absolutely brand new 3* characters just to exist in that tier not already in the game a.) Cost the devs money for licensing and b.) Given the ease of which 3* characters can be obtained and champed is almost impossible to monetise to pay for that licensing cost.

The previous releases meant they could monetise the 3* versions with vaults on release but in most cases only pay a single fee or a small fee on top to cover differences in the 3 & 5 versions. They know once those babies are in tokens you can bonus hero them to champ status is no time whatsoever and most players in the 3* tier and above know that also and so have reduced impetus to chase them.

I've seen explanations like this, but never from the developers themselves.  Is it based on actual knowledge passed on by one of the devs through a channel like Discord, or is it just a guess?  I don't remember seeing anything official on the forum.

I imagine the main cost that Demiurge can control is their own development time spent creating/testing move sets for new characters, and creating the artwork.  In that sense, it is clear that the dual 3/5 releases have less work (and money) put into them than two independent new characters.

I wouldn't really expect the 3* variants to ever recoup their development costs on their own, even if there was no additional licensing from Marvel.  I assumed they did them to give people a taste of the 5* variant: you've experienced what the 3* character is like fully levelled, so just imagine what the 5* one will be like.  If that was seen as the primary reason for making new 3* characters, then it was probably a bit of a double edged sword: playing 3* Angel didn't increase my desire to chase Archangel.

DAZ0273

jamesh said:

DAZ0273 said:

The problem is that creating absolutely brand new 3* characters just to exist in that tier not already in the game a.) Cost the devs money for licensing and b.) Given the ease of which 3* characters can be obtained and champed is almost impossible to monetise to pay for that licensing cost.

The previous releases meant they could monetise the 3* versions with vaults on release but in most cases only pay a single fee or a small fee on top to cover differences in the 3 & 5 versions. They know once those babies are in tokens you can bonus hero them to champ status is no time whatsoever and most players in the 3* tier and above know that also and so have reduced impetus to chase them.

I've seen explanations like this, but never from the developers themselves.  Is it based on actual knowledge passed on by one of the devs through a channel like Discord, or is it just a guess?  I don't remember seeing anything official on the forum.

I imagine the main cost that Demiurge can control is their own development time spent creating/testing move sets for new characters, and creating the artwork.  In that sense, it is clear that the dual 3/5 releases have less work (and money) put into them than two independent new characters.

I wouldn't really expect the 3* variants to ever recoup their development costs on their own, even if there was no additional licensing from Marvel.  I assumed they did them to give people a taste of the 5* variant: you've experienced what the 3* character is like fully levelled, so just imagine what the 5* one will be like.  If that was seen as the primary reason for making new 3* characters, then it was probably a bit of a double edged sword: playing 3* Angel didn't increase my desire to chase Archangel.

It's a guess.

Edit: Whilst I would agree about Angel, Strange & Thanos (the first two in the format) seem to fit the concept of trying to extract money out of players to chase them better - there are those who argue that 3* Strange is actually better than his 5* version, speaking realtively not in terms of actual damage etc,  due to the burst heal.

Dormammu

I have no idea how the licensing agreement between Marvel and Demi works, but I'd be very surprised if Demi had to pay Marvel every time they added a new character. The reason I say this is because Marvel seems to have a heavy hand in deciding who gets chosen for new releases, due to the fact that Marvel themselves are advertising this through various outlets, and how often new characters arrive. My guess is that Demi pays/paid a blanket licensing fee - whether that was a one-time fee or is something renewed every so often (annually, for example). In the grand scheme of Marvel's money-making machine this is probably not a very large amount, but where Marvel does benefit is the cross-promotional opportunities games like MPQ represent.

With all the movie and television tie-ins we see in MPQ, I would also guess that there is an agreement in the license that Marvel gets to directly choose some of the characters used, or that a certain number of them need to be tied to movie/television/comic releases or events. But all of this is just a guess. It's entirely possible Demi has complete freedom to put anyone they want into the game, and that it's their choice to tie things to other media in order to promote the MPQ brand and feed off the excitement for a new Marvel Studios project.

As for why they don't release more 3-stars (or below), the answer seems fairly obvious to me: they want the 4-star tier to be the choke point. They want players to be able to accelerate to the 4-star tier relatively quickly. That's the tier that's high-end enough for the more casual players, while still useful to the spenders at the 5-star tier. The 4-star tier represents the biggest opportunity for them to sell HP/ISO/Vaults and make some money.

sambrookjm

DAZ0273 said:

It's a guess.

Edit: Whilst I would agree about Angel, Strange & Thanos (the first two in the format) seem to fit the concept of trying to extract money out of players to chase them better - there are those who argue that 3* Strange is actually better than his 5* version, speaking realtively not in terms of actual damage etc,  due to the burst heal.

*Relatively* speaking, I would be one of the people agreeing with that point.  Strange (3-star) has a burst heal, which is better than no heal at all.  The constant removal of special tiles being useful is not nearly as useful.

That being said, the only time they're truly "equal" is in the Balance of Power Event.  Given a choice, I use my LVL 451 five-star Strange in just about every fight, as he's one of my four champed five-stars.