Are we done with 3* characters?

13»

Comments

  • Sim Mayor
    Sim Mayor Posts: 309 Mover and Shaker
    purplemur said:
    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!
    I like most of what you're saying, @purplemur, but I actually appreciate the 5/3 variants. The best explanation that I've seen for them is that it gives 4*-5* players something to chase, while not making 3* players feel like they're being left out in the cold. They tend to mix up the powers enough to keep both characters feeling distinct and, with the notable exception of Dr. Strange, like you've really gained something by getting the 5* version.
  • Heartbreaksoup
    Heartbreaksoup Posts: 356 Mover and Shaker
    I'd certainly love to have more 3*s, but more importantly I believe it is much more important for the game to be able to continue attracting players when there are new and exciting pieces at lower levels, particularly characters with a strong media presence and potential crossover appeal.  There should be a 3* Nakia to feed into Shuri, who should become a feeder for Okoye.  There should be a 3* Alex Wilder when the next season of Runaways drops to feed into Nico Minoru.  When the Captain Marvel film is released, along with the inevitable 5* Carol, we should have 3* and 4* characters from the movie.

    More than a year of play hasn't persuaded me that I'm wrong about wanting a few more 2* pieces for the brand new players, either, as well as one or two more rare ones like Howard.  I'd like a 2* Teen Groot in the same rarity tier as Bag-Man.
  • Jesus Jones
    Jesus Jones Posts: 182 Tile Toppler
    Yeah, I think we're done with them.  The more they release 4*s and are making more of them feed into the 5*s, I think it's all but over for the 3*s.  Just a matter of time, like a  year or two, before we start seeing 6* characters.
  • bbigler
    bbigler Posts: 2,111 Chairperson of the Boards
    Let's look at the numbers (excluding limited characters):

    7 x 1*s
    13 x 2*s = 86% increase
    47 x 3*s = 262% increase
    69 x 4*s = 47% increase
    27 x 5*s = 61% decrease

    So, where is this headed?  Well, in general as you go up in the tiers, there's more characters to cover AND it's harder to get those covers.  So, progression from tier to tier slows down exponentially, which appears to be what they want.  They want you to always have some carrot to chase after.  They want to control how fast players progress from tier to tier.  If I can champ all 3*s in my first 20 weeks, then do they want it to take 4 times longer to champ all 4*s?  It seems so.  Do they want 5* champing to take 4 times longer than that?

    I think they're biding their time, waiting for more players to be in the 4* tier.  Then they open up SCL 10 with 5* progression rewards.  I think the key to knowing their end goal is in the feeder rewards.  Maybe they want 3*s to feed 2 x 4*s (6 covers total) and then have 4*s feed just 1 x 5* (6 covers).  Perhaps their future goal is something like this:

    7 x 1*s
    13 x 2*s = 86% increase
    47 x 3*s = 262% increase
    94 x 4*s = 100% increase
    94 x 5*s = 0% change

    So, that would be 25 more 4*s and 67 more 5*s, which would take 3.5 years.  Perhaps by then they'll focus on new PVE events and villains!  To answer the OP's question, I think we're done with 3*s. 
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited August 2018
    bbigler said:
    Let's look at the numbers (excluding limited characters):

    7 x 1*s
    13 x 2*s = 86% increase
    47 x 3*s = 262% increase
    69 x 4*s = 47% increase
    27 x 5*s = 61% decrease

    So, where is this headed?  Well, in general as you go up in the tiers, there's more characters to cover AND it's harder to get those covers.  So, progression from tier to tier slows down exponentially, which appears to be what they want.  They want you to always have some carrot to chase after.  They want to control how fast players progress from tier to tier.  If I can champ all 3*s in my first 20 weeks, then do they want it to take 4 times longer to champ all 4*s?  It seems so.  Do they want 5* champing to take 4 times longer than that?

    I think they're biding their time, waiting for more players to be in the 4* tier.  Then they open up SCL 10 with 5* progression rewards.  I think the key to knowing their end goal is in the feeder rewards.  Maybe they want 3*s to feed 2 x 4*s (6 covers total) and then have 4*s feed just 1 x 5* (6 covers).  Perhaps their future goal is something like this:

    7 x 1*s
    13 x 2*s = 86% increase
    47 x 3*s = 262% increase
    94 x 4*s = 100% increase
    94 x 5*s = 0% change

    So, that would be 25 more 4*s and 67 more 5*s, which would take 3.5 years.  Perhaps by then they'll focus on new PVE events and villains!  To answer the OP's question, I think we're done with 3*s. 
    I've bounced that idea around.  Alternatively, 6*s.  Change release cycle to be 6* & 3*, 5* & 2*, 5* & 1* and cap 4*s.

    If we did this cycle for 23 6 week cycles (about 2.5 years) we'd end up with more balanced tiers

    30 x 1*s
    36 x 2*s 
    70 x 3*s 
    72 x 4*s 
    73 x 5*s
    23 x 6*s

    With a few events deviating from the pattern you could easily end up with:
    28 x 1*s
    36 x 2*s = 1 to 2 ratio for 2* to 3* feeders
    72 x 3*s = 1 to 1 ratio for 3* to 4* feeders
    72 x 4*s = 1 to 1 ratio for 3* to 4* feeders
    72 x 5*s = 1 to 1 ratio for 4* to 5* feeders
    24 x 6*s = 3 to 1 ratio for 5* to 6* feeders

    I picked =72 simply because nebula will be the 72nd 4* and the raito math worked out pretty well with it)

    This would help balance tiers, make dilution easier to manage due to symmetry, and allow for each release to have content for new and veteran players to chase.  They'd probably end up being lazy copies but I'd take accept if I knew this was the endgame.

    Now I realize it's extremely unlikely that this game or any game really has this kind of plan that they will stick to for 2.5 years, but it would make my logic / symmetry focused brain smile.

  • Jaedenkaal
    Jaedenkaal Posts: 3,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited August 2018
    Jaedenkaal said:
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
    Are you saying people want 70+ 4*s?  Heck, are you saying people want the 7 1*s we have now?  The way the game is setup it has to release new characters to keep going.  It's one of the negatives of the model they've chosen.  I'm just suggesting they spread it out before the floor breaks out of the 4* tier worse than it already is.

    Also if they were to go that route, which isn't likely so this all just a fun hypothetical, but I'd say they would/should make 1*s champable so people bother doing stuff with them.  Alternatively when 6*s come out upgrade the 7 1*s to 2*s and go for a 1 to 1 ratio on 2* to 3* feeders.  
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    broll said:
    Jaedenkaal said:
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
    Are you saying people want 70+ 4*s?  Heck, are you saying people want the 7 1*s we have now?  The way the game is setup it has to release new characters to keep going.  It's one of the negatives of the model they've chosen.  I'm just suggesting they spread it out before the floor breaks out of the 4* tier worse than it already is.

    Also if they were to go that route, which isn't likely so this all just a fun hypothetical, but I'd say they would/should make 1*s champable so people bother doing stuff with them.  Alternatively when 6*s come out upgrade the 7 1*s to 2*s and go for a 1 to 1 ratio on 2* to 3* feeders.  

    Dormammu said:
    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.
    As a 4* player with all but Emma champed I like my 70 4*s.  I would like it if they increased the 4* boosted list by 1 each week. Other than that, I’ll happily accept any new toys that are released as long as they are good. We’ve had some serious clunkers lately though. 
  • bbigler
    bbigler Posts: 2,111 Chairperson of the Boards
    I look at this from a game mechanics and player interest perspective.  They want people to start playing the game, have fun, get hooked and then stay for the long haul.  The best way to do that is by fast progression in the beginning, which slows down the further you go up.  So, you're slowly conditioned to accept slow progression in the 4* tier.  Plus, new players can "catch up" with old players in the 4* tier.  Many games have the mechanics of diminishing returns where you reach a general plateau with very slow upward progress. 

    That is why we should not have more than 7 x 1*s and 13 x 2*s and 47 x 3*s.  I'm not happy about getting more 4*s, but I believe it is inevitable.  Personally, I don't like the diminishing returns aspect of the game.  I wish progression was more linear and not an exponential inverse.  I'm fine with the next tier having more characters than the one before, but the time it takes to build those tiers is exhausting.  If I had my way, it would be like this:

    6 x 1*s
    12 x 2*s
    24 x 3*s
    48 x 4*s
    24 x 5*s

    And you could add champ levels for every character (including 1*s) up to 550.  But to make it fair, the higher tier characters should still have some advantage over a lower tier character at the same level.  Of course, the number of covers given for 1*s and 2*s would need to decrease a little.  The reason for "endless champ levels" is for the sake of team variety!  Plus, new players could somewhat compete with veteran players. 
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    Daredevil217 said:
    broll said:
    Jaedenkaal said:
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
    Are you saying people want 70+ 4*s?  Heck, are you saying people want the 7 1*s we have now?  The way the game is setup it has to release new characters to keep going.  It's one of the negatives of the model they've chosen.  I'm just suggesting they spread it out before the floor breaks out of the 4* tier worse than it already is.

    Also if they were to go that route, which isn't likely so this all just a fun hypothetical, but I'd say they would/should make 1*s champable so people bother doing stuff with them.  Alternatively when 6*s come out upgrade the 7 1*s to 2*s and go for a 1 to 1 ratio on 2* to 3* feeders.  

    Dormammu said:
    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.
    As a 4* player with all but Emma champed I like my 70 4*s.  I would like it if they increased the 4* boosted list by 1 each week. Other than that, I’ll happily accept any new toys that are released as long as they are good. We’ve had some serious clunkers lately though. 
    By 1 each week?  So in a year it would be like 56 out of 88?  That sounds like too much lol.
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    broll said:
    Daredevil217 said:
    broll said:
    Jaedenkaal said:
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
    Are you saying people want 70+ 4*s?  Heck, are you saying people want the 7 1*s we have now?  The way the game is setup it has to release new characters to keep going.  It's one of the negatives of the model they've chosen.  I'm just suggesting they spread it out before the floor breaks out of the 4* tier worse than it already is.

    Also if they were to go that route, which isn't likely so this all just a fun hypothetical, but I'd say they would/should make 1*s champable so people bother doing stuff with them.  Alternatively when 6*s come out upgrade the 7 1*s to 2*s and go for a 1 to 1 ratio on 2* to 3* feeders.  

    Dormammu said:
    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.
    As a 4* player with all but Emma champed I like my 70 4*s.  I would like it if they increased the 4* boosted list by 1 each week. Other than that, I’ll happily accept any new toys that are released as long as they are good. We’ve had some serious clunkers lately though. 
    By 1 each week?  So in a year it would be like 56 out of 88?  That sounds like too much lol.
    Sorry if that was confusing. I’m saying the weekly boost list should be increased by one. Meaning instead of like 5 (or how ever many it is) boosted characters we have each week, we instead get six (or how we many it is plus 1). 
  • jamesh
    jamesh Posts: 1,600 Chairperson of the Boards
    Daredevil217 said:
    broll said:
    Daredevil217 said:
    broll said:
    Jaedenkaal said:
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
    Are you saying people want 70+ 4*s?  Heck, are you saying people want the 7 1*s we have now?  The way the game is setup it has to release new characters to keep going.  It's one of the negatives of the model they've chosen.  I'm just suggesting they spread it out before the floor breaks out of the 4* tier worse than it already is.

    Also if they were to go that route, which isn't likely so this all just a fun hypothetical, but I'd say they would/should make 1*s champable so people bother doing stuff with them.  Alternatively when 6*s come out upgrade the 7 1*s to 2*s and go for a 1 to 1 ratio on 2* to 3* feeders.  

    Dormammu said:
    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.
    As a 4* player with all but Emma champed I like my 70 4*s.  I would like it if they increased the 4* boosted list by 1 each week. Other than that, I’ll happily accept any new toys that are released as long as they are good. We’ve had some serious clunkers lately though. 
    By 1 each week?  So in a year it would be like 56 out of 88?  That sounds like too much lol.
    Sorry if that was confusing. I’m saying the weekly boost list should be increased by one. Meaning instead of like 5 (or how ever many it is) boosted characters we have each week, we instead get six (or how we many it is plus 1). 
    I posted a thread in the suggestions sub-forum about this back in December:


    My argument there was that in December 2016, 5 boosted characters represented 12.5% of the tier resulting in each character being boosted once every 8 weeks (alternatively, the average wait for a character to be boosted was 4 weeks).  To get the same frequency in December 2017, we would need 7 boosted characters.

    Bringing it forward, we're getting close to needing 9 boosted characters to hit that frequency.
  • Jaedenkaal
    Jaedenkaal Posts: 3,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    broll said:
    Jaedenkaal said:
    No one wants 30 1*s. They'd have to just give the covers away without tokens just so you could cover some of them, and as soon as you hit 2* land you're just selling all your 1* covers anyways,
    Are you saying people want 70+ 4*s?  Heck, are you saying people want the 7 1*s we have now?  The way the game is setup it has to release new characters to keep going.  It's one of the negatives of the model they've chosen.  I'm just suggesting they spread it out before the floor breaks out of the 4* tier worse than it already is.

    Also if they were to go that route, which isn't likely so this all just a fun hypothetical, but I'd say they would/should make 1*s champable so people bother doing stuff with them.  Alternatively when 6*s come out upgrade the 7 1*s to 2*s and go for a 1 to 1 ratio on 2* to 3* feeders.  
    That's different. You can already play the game, regardless of how many new 4*s there are. A new player coming into the game would have a hell of a time getting anywhere if they had to open 30 standard tokens (which they can't even buy) to get all their characters up to 1 cover. Not to mention the additional front-loading of roster slot requirements.
  • Projectus2501
    Projectus2501 Posts: 218 Tile Toppler
    I would also like to see more 3* and less 4 and 5* releases ...
    Ps: 5* player here
  • PiMacleod
    PiMacleod Posts: 1,787 Chairperson of the Boards
    As a high-end 4* player that's been around since before there was a daily login reward system, I too want more 3*s.  You just look at them and the mechanics they use...  Its easy to see how much more they could do.  Make a 3* that plays with fortified tiles, another that plays with more passive abilities, one that plays with invisibility, another for flight... Etc, etc.

    My reason is to spice things up for the up and coming players.  Also, when those mandatory 3* PvP events happen, we can see more variety of teams, because there will be different synergies due to different mechanics in play.  A 3* fortified tile user would be fun for some, and in 4* land Shuri would actually get teamed up with them.  Just an example.

Categories